Chris Gerhard wrote:
I'm trying to create a directory hierarchy that when ever a file is created it
is created mode 664 with directories 775.
Now I can do this with chmod to create the ACL on UFS and it behaves as
expected howerver on ZFS it does not.
So what exactly are you trying to accomplish by doing this?
ZFS always honors the umask and mode during file/dir creates. UFS
ignores the umask when default ACLs are present. This is actually a
POSIX violation in UFS.
If your desire is to allow certain users/groups to access/write to
various files in the directory tree then you can use the various
inheritance flags, such as "file_inherit, dir_inherit, inherit_only and
no_propagate" to control how the permissions flow down the tree.
: pearson TS 68 $; mkdir ~/tmp/acl
: pearson TS 69 $; df -h ~/tmp/acl
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
tank/users/cjg 100G 22G 75G 23% /tank/users/cjg
: pearson TS 70 $; mkdir /var/tmp/acl
: pearson TS 71 $; df -h /var/tmp/acl
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
/dev/md/dsk/d4 9.6G 4.7G 4.8G 50% /
: pearson TS 72 $; chmod
A=user::rwx,group::rwx,other:r-x,default:user::rwx,default:group::rwx,default:other:r-x,default:mask:rwx
/var/tmp/acl /home/cjg/tmp/acl
: pearson TS 73 $;
Why are you trying to set a POSIX draft ACL on ZFS? What you end up
with is an ACL that was translated from POSIX Draft -> ZFS/NFSv4.
So at this point should both have funtionally identical ACLs?
If I now create a file in each directory I end up with different results:
: pearson TS 73 $; touch /var/tmp/acl/file ~/tmp/acl/file
: pearson TS 74 $; ls -l /var/tmp/acl/file ~/tmp/acl/file
-rw-r-----+ 1 cjg staff 0 Oct 24 17:25 /home/cjg/tmp/acl/file
-rw-rw-r-- 1 cjg staff 0 Oct 24 17:25 /var/tmp/acl/file
: pearson TS 75 $;
: pearson TS 75 $; ls -lV ~/tmp/acl/file
-rw-r-----+ 1 cjg staff 0 Oct 24 17:25 /home/cjg/tmp/acl/file
owner@:-----DaA--c--s:------:allow
owner@:--------------:------:deny
group@:-------A---C--:------:deny
group@:-----Da---c--s:------:allow
group@:-------A---C--:------:deny
everyone@:------a---c--s:------:allow
everyone@:-----D-A---C--:------:deny
owner@:--x-----------:------:deny
owner@:rw-p---A-W-Co-:------:allow
group@:-wxp----------:------:deny
group@:r-------------:------:allow
everyone@:rwxp---A-W-Co-:------:deny
everyone@:------a-R-c--s:------:allow
: pearson TS 76 $;
So in the ZFS case I don't have what I wanted or expected.
Can you achieve the same results with the new ACLs?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
